Congress targets Big Tech with new antitrust rules and expedited lawsuits

What it does

This bill creates new antitrust rules for 'systemically important platforms'—defined as tech companies with over $175 billion in annual revenue and 34% of U.S. users or households. It prohibits these platforms from favoring their own products over competitors, blocking interoperability, tying services together, using competitors' data against them, locking users into defaults, or retaliating against users who report violations. The FTC, Department of Justice, and state attorneys general can enforce these rules through civil lawsuits, with penalties of 1–10% of U.S. revenue and expedited court proceedings.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is to establish new antitrust prohibitions and enforcement mechanisms specifically targeting large digital platforms. It is substantively an antitrust statute, not a privacy, consumer protection, or innovation bill, despite the title's invocation of 'choice.'

What the text implies

• The $175B revenue threshold and 34% user threshold are designed to capture approximately 5–6 companies (Meta, Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, TikTok). The bill does not name them, but the thresholds function as a de facto list, creating legal uncertainty for companies near the threshold and potential gaming of revenue/user metrics.
• The 'materially harms competition' standard is undefined and will be litigated extensively. Courts must interpret whether conduct that harms individual competitors (e.g., a search algorithm change) meets this threshold, creating years of uncertainty and potential inconsistent rulings.
• Data portability and interoperability mandates may require platforms to share nonpublic user data with competitors, raising privacy and security risks if not carefully implemented. The bill includes carve-outs for national security and foreign adversaries, but the scope of 'data' is delegated to FTC rulemaking (180 days post-enactment).
• Expedited litigation (1-year target for final judgment) may favor plaintiffs (FTC/DOJ/states) by compressing discovery and expert analysis timelines, potentially disadvantaging defendants' ability to mount complex technical defenses.
• The 'pattern or practice' forfeiture provision allows courts to strip CEO and officer compensation retroactively (12 months before or after complaint filing), creating personal liability that may deter settlement and increase litigation risk.

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens and small businesses gain clearer competitive protections and data rights on dominant platforms, reducing lock-in and self-dealing. The bill creates enforceable remedies and expedited litigation, making it harder for tech giants to abuse market power. However, the bill's scope is narrow (only ~5 companies), and enforcement depends on agency resources and judicial interpretation.

Who stands to gain

• small and mid-sized tech companies competing on major platforms
• e-commerce sellers on Amazon, Meta, Google
• alternative search engines and app stores
• data analytics and AI startups seeking platform data access
• state attorneys general (litigation authority and potential settlements)

Named in the bill

Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Department of Justice (DOJ), State Attorneys General, Systemically Important Platform Operators, Business Users, Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, TikTok, Clayton Act — and 4 more

Where it stands

5 cosponsors: 4 Democrats, 1 Republicans.

• Jun 10, 2026 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Jun 10, 2026 — Referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

12 lobbying clients named this bill on 12 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $24,580,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 8 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 93% of bills with at least one filing.

Chuck Grassley, the sponsor, reported $49,167 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $16,950,000 on 1 filing
• Amazon.com Services LLC — $4,360,000 on 1 filing
• Apple Inc — $2,740,000 on 1 filing
• Apple Inc. — $180,000 on 1 filing
• Apple Inc. — $90,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.